Allows the use of many of the newer, 30mm spindle cranksets as well as SRAM's GXP.
Bigger spindle actually ends up being lighter and stiffer. If you run adapter cups and a Shimano setup, the weight penalty is only a few grams.

You can also get an eccentric adapter to tweak BB height or chainstay length or run a SS setup

In addition to what's already been mentioned, you can also run Shimano cranks with the Problem Solvers eccentric, which, if nothing else, could give you some bb-height adjustment (not to mention bb fore-aft adjustment).

well, when I got my new (non-Ventana) frame with a traditional BB, the LBS was employed to clean up the threads a bit, just a simple chase job. well, when that park tool is used the wrong direction, you have threads cross-chased in the BB shell, which leaves the frame ruined. yeah, that happened, and might have been avoided with a press-fit bb.

well, when I got my new (non-Ventana) frame with a traditional BB, the LBS was employed to clean up the threads a bit, just a simple chase job. well, when that park tool is used the wrong direction, you have threads cross-chased in the BB shell, which leaves the frame ruined. yeah, that happened, and might have been avoided with a press-fit bb.

well, when I got my new (non-Ventana) frame with a traditional BB, the LBS was employed to clean up the threads a bit, just a simple chase job. well, when that park tool is used the wrong direction, you have threads cross-chased in the BB shell, which leaves the frame ruined. yeah, that happened, and might have been avoided with a press-fit bb.

It could have also been avoided by not giving the mechanic beer before doing the work.

Why the press fit bottom bracket?

Well, I have one BB86 Pressfit frame, A bit of quality grease in the bearings every once and a while and 1700 miles later, nary a sound.
Internal14 pointed out to me Wheels Manufacturing makes a BB73 version that threads together. Really like the Idea behind that one.

As it was explained to me, PF30 is the new standard. Its what China is intent on using and all the leading brands are using. Yes, there are performance advantages and the engineering on most PF30 BBs is exceptional.

However, if you choose to stay with a threaded BB, you may eventually find yourself with limited options when its time for an upgrade.

Was this explained to you by someone selling you the product? PF30 may be the new standard for mass produced frames looking to cut costs, that doesn't make it the superior system. I've seen more comments recently about sticking with threaded and how much press fit sucks, so I would argue the honeymoon may be ending. I would also question the performance advantages and engineering considering the number of press fit to threaded adapters available, and the number of threads about PF BB's that squeak, or how to remove bearings from a carbon fame without damaging the frame. They DO have the advantage of having room to use a PF30 eccentric adapter if wanting to adapt to SS.

Re leading brands, Santa Cruz has stuck with threaded all along, with the exception of their new cross frame. Ibis had put BB92 on the Ripley and Tranny, and has gone back to threaded on the HD3.

I'm far more comfortable with needing threaded BB parts in the future than with one of the variations of press fit. Between BB30, PF30, BB92, etc., seems more opportunities for parts to be orphaned with PF variations IMO.

Re: Why the press fit bottom bracket?

Originally Posted by bingemtbr

As it was explained to me, PF30 is the new standard. Its what China is intent on using and all the leading brands are using. Yes, there are performance advantages and the engineering on most PF30 BBs is exceptional.

However, if you choose to stay with a threaded BB, you may eventually find yourself with limited options when its time for an upgrade.

You should tell that to Santa Cruz or Ibis... Looks like they did not get the memo and still use threaded BB...

Why does this frame use a standard thread-in bottom bracket, when many of your competitors use press-in style (BB30, Pressfit 30, BB90, BB92, BB86)

It is true that there are some slight weight savings available with the various pressfit bb designs (exact weight savings obviously vary depending on system, frame manufacturing techniques, and crank model), but we don't feel this small savings make up for the inconveniences. We are still able to make a frame that is lighter than most of our competitors, while still using a heavier bb system. There are a number of disadvantages that exist with press fit systems:

1) Special installation and removal tools are required for these parts, including a headset press. This is not convenient for most home mechanics, and they are quite expensive. Traditional external BB's can be installed or removed with a simple $10 hand tool.

3) Creaking or shifting bb's can be common with these systems. Since the bearing is pressed into a cup, which is then pressed into the frame- it can be hard to get all of the press fits snug- without being too tight on the bearing or too loose in the frame.

4) Reasonable tube sizes. One of the most commonly claimed advantages of a larger bb shell is the larger diameter downtube that goes with it. This may be an advantage on road bikes, where tubes can be incredibly thin and large for optimal stiffness. On a mountain bike, this area of the frame sees a lot of abuse from rocks and crashing, and needs to have a certain amount of wall thickness to survive actual use. Using what we consider a "safe" wall thickness and carbon layup, and a fairly typical tube diameter, we get an exceedingly stiff, light, durable product. If we used a larger downtube, we would either have a heavier frame (same wall thickness but larger diameter), or a less durable product (thinner walls and larger diameter).

5) Chain clearance. Take a look at some of our competitors frames with press in bb shells. The down tube comes so close to the chainrings that many frames have chainsuck guards on the downtube! In our mind, the chain should be able to fall off on a mountain bike and not get jammed between your crank and thin-walled carbon downtube.

6) Backwards compatibility: Many of our customers purchase a frame and build it up with their choice of parts, or parts from an old bike. By using a standard bb, we are compatible with everything without requiring confusing adaptors.

7) Chainguide compatibility: While it may seem strange to talk about putting chainguides on a short travel bike, it is becoming more common now with 10 speed drivetrains. Thread in bb's mean the frame is compatible with bb mount chainguides. We like versatility....

My above comment was what I was told by someone whom I trust. Whether Santa Cruz (insert any other brand you'd like here) offers a PF30 isn't really relevant unless I was considering a Santa Cruz.

My own $.02, I've ridden a Ventana since 2003. I absolutely and completely trust anything Sherwood designs. Whether the inclusion of these new designs is owed to the latest-&-best engineering, design "trends", or simply aesthetics, I trust it. So by the simple virtue of PF30 being part of my Ciclon, I tried it without hesitation. 2200 miles and 6 months later, it still rocks.

Re: Why the press fit bottom bracket?

Originally Posted by bingemtbr

As it was explained to me, PF30 is the new standard. Its what China is intent on using and all the leading brands are using. Yes, there are performance advantages and the engineering on most PF30 BBs is exceptional.

However, if you choose to stay with a threaded BB, you may eventually find yourself with limited options when its time for an upgrade.

Originally Posted by bingemtbr

My above comment was what I was told by someone whom I trust. Whether Santa Cruz (insert any other brand you'd like here) offers a PF30 isn't really relevant unless I was considering a Santa Cruz.

My own $.02, I've ridden a Ventana since 2003. I absolutely and completely trust anything Sherwood designs. Whether the inclusion of these new designs is owed to the latest-&-best engineering, design "trends", or simply aesthetics, I trust it. So by the simple virtue of PF30 being part of my Ciclon, I tried it without hesitation. 2200 miles and 6 months later, it still rocks.

There were 2 comments in your first post which are inaccurate.
You say all the leading brands use PF BB, which is not true.
You say the threaded BB won't be around and the choice would be limited. Nothing indicates that and you can see companies like Ibis going back to threaded BB, because their customers asked for it.
Threaded BB is easier to service, less prone to creaking and just plainly works.
Press fit has been pushed by some manufacturers in order to make cheaper frames.

The advantages of PF 30 are in mass frame manufacturing where tolerances aren't tight. That's not a problem with Ventana. Ventana using PF30 looks to me like them conforming to perceived market demands more than adopting a superior standard. On the SS Ventana just built for me, I told Sherwood I preferred threaded, but would do PF 30 if he strongly recommended it over threaded. He said threaded was good.

I'm seeing a disconnect between:

Originally Posted by bingemtbr

As it was explained to me, PF30 is the new standard. Its what China is intent on using and all the leading brands are using. Yes, there are performance advantages and the engineering on most PF30 BBs is exceptional.

and

Originally Posted by bingemtbr

I absolutely and completely trust anything Sherwood designs. Whether the inclusion of these new designs is owed to the latest-&-best engineering, design "trends", or simply aesthetics, I trust it.

FWIW, where you ride can make a big difference in preferred BB. The easy servicing afforded by being able to remove the threaded cup and replace either bearings in the cup or the entire BB is well worth it in this climate.

Blind trust is very scary, PF30 is a what MFG's went to to compete against the BB30 without the frame tolerance required to run a BB30. In other words it is a poor mans version of a BB30. If you want it done right they should go with BB30 but instead they cheapened out.

PF30 was chosen to maintain ALL Crankset compatibility. Not because of tolerances or cost.

I have no personal experience with any type of press in BB, but I'd wager that a lot of the complaints get overblown, just like everything else on MTBR. My only concern would be the ability to easily service the BB at home. Plus, I really don't want to purchase more tools to have the ability to service the BB at home.

BB30 accomplished all of that, so why the PF30, Hmmmm. Could it be tolerances and costs, DING DING DING, we have a winner!

Uh, back in 2012 BB30 did not maintain ALL crankset compatibility. There are plenty of adapters available today, but back when the new V frames came out this was not the case. Sherwood chose PF30 because it wouldn't force owners to choose one particular manufacturer of cranksets.

To even insinuate cost and tolerances on Ventana's was a factor clearly shows your biases and lack of knowledge of the brand.

I have no personal experience with any type of press in BB, but I'd wager that a lot of the complaints get overblown, just like everything else on MTBR. My only concern would be the ability to easily service the BB at home. Plus, I really don't want to purchase more tools to have the ability to service the BB at home.

I have to laugh at the "hysteria" surrounding the PF BB's. Its no different than when Shimano first came out with Hollow Tech II outboard bearings, "They won't last, they'll pull out of the threads, etc etc." Now they are the standard that can't be abandoned?!?! Creaking anything is annoying, I get that. But much like the squealing brake issue before, it's usually more about setup and proper installation than anything else.

I have bikes with either Chris King threaded or PF30 BBs. The PF30 is as easily serviceable as the threaded BB with the appropriate grease injector tool in my opinion, as you really shouldn't need to remove the cups, unless something is really wrong.

Brah, you are wrong. Get over it. PF30 was invented to save money. I agree that Sherwood did not do it to save money, but that IS WHY the PF30 came into existence.

But if you think you know everything give Teresa or Sherwood a call and ask why he chose PF30 and not BB30? I know the answer do you?

I think you are very confused. Where did I state that PF30 WASNT invented for save Money? You are changing the discussion to fit your arguement. I simply stated, AS YOU JUST AGREED TOO, that Sherwood chose it for compatibility reasons at the time, not for the ease of construction.
No where did I discuss WHY PF30 was invented in the first place?

It's worth noting that Ventana will build a frame with threaded BB if one requests it, via their customization programs. Sherwood also acknowledged that PF30 did not make a better frame when I asked this. I personally would be annoyed if I were charged extra to revert back to what I view as a superior system.

Originally Posted by Ciclistagonzo

I think you are very confused. Where did I state that PF30 WASNT invented for save Money? You are changing the discussion to fit your arguement. I simply stated, AS YOU JUST AGREED TOO, that Sherwood chose it for compatibility reasons at the time, not for the ease of construction.
No where did I discuss WHY PF30 was invented in the first place?

Well, I have one BB86 Pressfit frame, A bit of quality grease in the bearings every once and a while and 1700 miles later, nary a sound.
Internal14 pointed out to me Wheels Manufacturing makes a BB73 version that threads together. Really like the Idea behind that one.

I know you are having a tough time believing this, but back in June 2011 (see the dates on the Spy shot thread) and actually earlier when the design was being done (late 2010/early 2011). BB30 was a proprietary standard for SRAM cranks. Sherwood didn't want to commit Ventana owners to one brand of cranks. All the adapters you see today didn't exist, there was one by Praxis I believe that allowed the threaded BB to be used. I didn't dwell on it at the time and ask further since that seemed a reasonable answer.

I know you are having a tough time believing this, but back in June 2011 (see the dates on the Spy shot thread) and actually earlier when the design was being done (late 2010/early 2011). BB30 was a proprietary standard for SRAM cranks. Sherwood didn't want to commit Ventana owners to one brand of cranks. All the adapters you see today didn't exist, there was one by Praxis I believe that allowed the threaded BB to be used. I didn't dwell on it at the time and ask further since that seemed a reasonable answer.

I personally do not like PF BB's and Sherwood was more than accommodating when I purchased my new 650B HT. And with all the BB's available I can run a BB30 crank with a thread in race face BB.

This is thread is turning into one of those my wheels size is better than yours or the super wide rim movement. I say ride what works for you but just get out there and ride.

I think you are right, Cannondale invented it and my fuzzy recollection from 4+ years ago is that SRAM was the only other crank available other than the C-dale cranks. Same problem was the issue. limited choices.

As to the second point, yep, and I think Flucod would agree too, just ride!

Well, I have one BB86 Pressfit frame, A bit of quality grease in the bearings every once and a while and 1700 miles later, nary a sound.
Internal14 pointed out to me Wheels Manufacturing makes a BB73 version that threads together. Really like the Idea behind that one.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My uncle had this intermittent abdominal pain for several months, but just kept taking Vicodin whenever it came back, which took care of the pain.

Problem solved, right? No need to investigate it any further.

He didn't realize he had pancreatic cancer until he turned yellow from jaundice and was forced to see a doctor who ordered the CT that found the mass. He was dead in thirteen months.

Using grease to eliminate the creaking from a pressfit bottom bracket is exactly the same thing. It merely hides the symptom of a bigger problem - ie movement of the bottom bracket within the bb shell. By using grease, you've simply allowed your bottom bracket to move more freely.

The pressfit bottom bracket is an absolutely wretched design - arguably the single worst design idea in the history of bicycles. And make no mistake about it: it was borne out of a desire to minimize manufacturing costs, and nothing else. It was made to be an alternative to the bb30 design, so that frame manufacturers wouldn't have to manufacture their bb shells to the tight tolerances that bb30 requires.

And let me also point out that the bb30 idea is almost as idiotic as pressfit30. Both designs have modified the component of the bike that endures the most stress (ie the bottom bracket), and have eliminated the threads that historically kept bottom brackets secure and immobile. Pressed in cups were fine for headsets because the headset doesn't typically take the huge repetitive forces that a bottom bracket does. (And yet, creaking still occurred occasionally with standard headsets). Anyone with half a brain should have predicted creaking problems with pf30. But leave it to a company like cannondale to come up with a design so moronic.

Larger spindles, you say? First off, I don't ever remember anyone complaining about lack or spindle stiffness in the previous Octalink and Isis designs that dominated the market. Flex generally came from the frame anyway, not the spindle. And it would have been easy to make the bottom bracket shells just a touch larger to include threads rather than resorting to pressing in bearings or bearing cups.

My uncle had this intermittent abdominal pain for several months, but just kept taking Vicodin whenever it came back, which took care of the pain.

Problem solved, right? No need to investigate it any further.

He didn't realize he had pancreatic cancer until he turned yellow from jaundice and was forced to see a doctor who ordered the CT that found the mass. He was dead in thirteen months.

Using grease to eliminate the creaking from a pressfit bottom bracket is exactly the same thing. It merely hides the symptom of a bigger problem - ie movement of the bottom bracket within the bb shell. By using grease, you've simply allowed your bottom bracket to move more freely.

The pressfit bottom bracket is an absolutely wretched design - arguably the single worst design idea in the history of bicycles. And make no mistake about it: it was borne out of a desire to minimize manufacturing costs, and nothing else. It was made to be an alternative to the bb30 design, so that frame manufacturers wouldn't have to manufacture their bb shells to the tight tolerances that bb30 requires.

And let me also point out that the bb30 idea is almost as idiotic as pressfit30. Both designs have modified the component of the bike that endures the most stress (ie the bottom bracket), and have eliminated the threads that historically kept bottom brackets secure and immobile. Pressed in cups were fine for headsets because the headset doesn't typically take the huge repetitive forces that a bottom bracket does. (And yet, creaking still occurred occasionally with standard headsets). Anyone with half a brain should have predicted creaking problems with pf30. But leave it to a company like cannondale to come up with a design so moronic.

Larger spindles, you say? First off, I don't ever remember anyone complaining about lack or spindle stiffness in the previous Octalink and Isis designs that dominated the market. Flex generally came from the frame anyway, not the spindle. And it would have been easy to make the bottom bracket shells just a touch larger to include threads rather than resorting to pressing in bearings or bearing cups.

First of, I am sorry to here about your uncle.........everyone that experiences something abnormal within their body should go see a doctor.

In some instances you're right about press fit BB's......their is nothing wrong with threaded bottom brackets. But their is a thing called tolerances which allow designs to vary from the ideal fit, form and function. It's possible to have a BB come in on the lower end of the PF30 spec and the BB shell go to the larger end.....creating a gap. That doesn't account for surface finish irregularities. And the SRAM composite BB assemblies are not the solution.

Grease is not the ideal solution for a gap filler since it allows for moment. Loctite makes specific products for gap filling the irregularities in press fit components

First of, I am sorry to here about your uncle.........everyone that experiences something abnormal within their body should go see a doctor.

In some instances you're right about press fit BB's......their is nothing wrong with threaded bottom brackets. But their is a thing called tolerances which allow designs to vary from the ideal fit, form and function. It's possible to have a BB come in on the lower end of the PF30 spec and the BB shell go to the larger end.....creating a gap. That doesn't account for surface finish irregularities. And the SRAM composite BB assemblies are not the solution.

Grease is not the ideal solution for a gap filler since it allows for moment. Loctite makes specific products for gap filling the irregularities in press fit components

Press fit joints are not bad they just have to be controlled and it's the responsibility of the manufacture to put out product that falls within the published specification.

The whole purpose of the pf30 standard was to allow for looser tolerances. Using loctite to fill in the gaps is unacceptably 'makeshift' for such a vital area on a bicycle. As for the use of grease when installing pressfit bb bearing cups, it's not for filling in gaps. Rather, it's for shutting up the creaking noise that occurs with movement of the bearing cups. It does nothing to stop the movement, however, which is itself a problem with or without the noise.

Furthermore, with threaded BBs, even if the tolerances were loose, it sure as hell didn't matter because the threads kept everything rigid and immobile.

Overall, the standard bottom bracket that we've used for decades in the past was just fine. I challenge anyone to provide any hard data that these 30mm spindles, combined with bb30 or pf30 bb designs, provide any net benefit over the traditional threaded bb.

These new bb standards demonstrate unequivocally how stupid bicycle designers are, and how they have no real engineering background whatsoever. They clearly have exceedingly little understanding of even basic kinematics.

And let's face it, Cannondale has always sought to do things differently, even when there was no advantage to it whatsoever. We've seen it in the past with their idiotic road frame designs (back in the 90's) that utilized enormously oversized aluminum tubes - ie the diameter of soda cans. And let's not forget about their ridiculous Head Shock and Lefty front suspension designs, which were also comically useless. Cannondale is truly a company that thinks outside of the box but comes up with nothing. The current explosion of bb standards is their doing, and bicycle manufacturers were too dumb to pass on the fad and stick with what made more sense from an engineering standpoint, and had been tried and true for decades.

And let's not forget about their ridiculous Head Shock and Lefty front suspension designs, which were also comically useless. Cannondale is truly a company that thinks outside of the box but comes up with nothing. The current explosion of bb standards is their doing, and bicycle manufacturers were too dumb to pass on the fad and stick with what made more sense from an engineering standpoint, and had been tried and true for decades.

I mostly agree with you. I recently gave up on Cannondale cf frames. The warranty is great but it's annoying that the frames break non stop under normal xc riding conditions. I have always hated bb30.

But, the Lefty design is tried and true (I guess 13 years or so) and still very current and I don't get your comment unless maybe you have not ridden one. It's a better design than two sided forks, solves stiction, it's lighter, you can change/install a tube without removing the wheel. People are excited about new rock shox rs-1 with it's inverted fork that Leftys have always had, but it's heavy and... well just google video search for "RockShox RS-1 - flexible?". I have had lots of problems with the frames but absolutely none with the the Lefty. If it weren't for patents, Rock Shox would sell Righty's and everyone would love them.

I was told candidly (not by Ventana) that pressfit 30 shells were accepted by the industry to reduce costs of manufacturing. There's simply much more room for welding and less mitering and welding steps, and room for looser tolerances, which increase mass production yields and extend the useful life of tooling. That and Shimano BBs are so friggen solid and inexpensive that they cornered the BB market, leaving hardly any room for competition to make money.

A rookie welder mistake might be to not fully weld a seat tube onto a BB shell, before welding the downtube over it. This leads to a guaranteed crack in that area. QA might have steps here to ensure it's fully welded, which goes back to the jig to tack on the DT, which adds time to the process. They can skip these steps with a less expensive larger diameter PF BB (that doesn't require thread tapping, facing, etc.), not having to miter the DT to fit onto the seat tube, and just tack everything on the jig at once and send it to be completely welded, saving considerable time, which might be the difference between a small Taiwanese factory churning out 200 of a particular model's frame a day, versus 160 (25% more).

They say the original 68/73 threaded shell was intended for steel tubing. With larger diameter Al and Ti tubing, the problem arises. Cannondale, being heavily invested into aluminum products came up with this solution, which also replaces a steel crank spindle with an Al on. Brands specializing in Al have even gone as far as forming head tubes (Specialized smart weld), not to mention forming tube ends to better match the BB shell, such as flattening and widening the downtube. Looking at some stiff high performance racing Al frame with threaded BBs, the BB sometimes looks like it's the smallest diameter tube on the entire bike besides the seat stays.

See examples of a Ti frame (slightly larger diameter than steel) here:

Using grease to eliminate the creaking from a pressfit bottom bracket is exactly the same thing. It merely hides the symptom of a bigger problem - ie movement of the bottom bracket within the bb shell. By using grease, you've simply allowed your bottom bracket to move more freely.

First, sorry about your Uncle, Cancer sucks, Period.

However, your interpretation of what I originally wrote is definitely colored by your bias. (You hate PF BB's) I didn't say I had a creak or squeak, and I didn't say I greased the Press Fit portion of the BB. I said quality grease in the bearings, as in INSIDE the bearings where the balls and cages are. I was recommended this by mechanic I highly trust to eliminate a Click at 1600 miles. I'm now at 1900 miles and still silent running.
The click was from the bearing themselves running dry as he put it.

The whole purpose of the pf30 standard was to allow for looser tolerances. Using loctite to fill in the gaps is unacceptably 'makeshift' for such a vital area on a bicycle. As for the use of grease when installing pressfit bb bearing cups, it's not for filling in gaps. Rather, it's for shutting up the creaking noise that occurs with movement of the bearing cups. It does nothing to stop the movement, however, which is itself a problem with or without the noise.

Furthermore, with threaded BBs, even if the tolerances were loose, it sure as hell didn't matter because the threads kept everything rigid and immobile.

Overall, the standard bottom bracket that we've used for decades in the past was just fine. I challenge anyone to provide any hard data that these 30mm spindles, combined with bb30 or pf30 bb designs, provide any net benefit over the traditional threaded bb.

These new bb standards demonstrate unequivocally how stupid bicycle designers are, and how they have no real engineering background whatsoever. They clearly have exceedingly little understanding of even basic kinematics.

So you know what the whole purpose of the PF30 standard? Then problem solved because you know everything......but from my vantage point you know nothing about press fit joints. Google "ANSI B4.1 Standard Limits and Fits" and educate yourself on this topic. Then come back and have an educated discussion on press fit joints.